Behavior Modification and Trial

Reinforcement Magnitude and Response Rate

Original research is detailed within this document about the correlation between reinforcement magnitude and response rate. Literature indicates there is a positive correlation between these two phenomena, which served as the hypothesis for this experiment. Participants were randomly assigned colored tokens that correlated to amounts of candy for correctly stringing together beads. The results indicate that the more candy they were given (which functioned in this study as research magnitude), the longer more prolonged their response rate was -- because they opted to continue with the clinical trials. These results served to underscore the fact that there is a causal relationship between reinforcement magnitude and response rate consistent with literature on this topic.

INTRODUCTION

This paper will explore the phenomenon of reinforcer magnitude on response rate. It is attempting to determine if there is a correlation between the magnitude of reinforcement and the rate of response of participants. Moreover, it is seeking to ascertain the nature of that relationship and determine if the stronger the magnitude of a reinforce, the longer the response rate of participants will be. Such a relationship would be causal in nature.

The primary learning principle studied in this research paper is the magnitude of reinforcers. There is an abundance of research that indicates that reinforcers are effective mechanisms for learning or for participant participation. Reinforcers are a means of emphasizing a certain type of behavior. They can include either rewards or deterrents such as punishments. The other primary concept examined within this document is response rate.

For the purpose of this paper response rate is determined by the length of time that a subject is willing to respond to instructions or a call to a particular type of behavior. The author of this document seeks to determine if response rate can be influenced by reinforcers and the specific magnitude of those reinforcers. As previously mentioned, there is a bevy of research that demonstrates that there is a correlation between the magnitude of reinforcers and responses. However, the majority of this research pertains to reinforcer magnitude and response rate.

METHODS

This research study relied on a series of clinical research trials that provided evidence that was largely quantitative in nature. The basis of that trial was having participants string beads together. The number of beads that they were able to string together were utilized to determine the response rate of the participants. The reinforcer magnitude analyzed was candy, which was given to the participants based on how many beads they were able to string together.

Participants

The sample for the participants was young children between the ages of 6 and 11 years old. Children were recruited from Kaiser Elementary school. Students were excluded if they were in special education, what is commonly termed as 'resource' in many educational institutions. Students were allowed to individually leave class for no more than 10 minutes at a time while participating in the experiment.

Response Measurement

The target behavior upon which the study was based was the response rate of participants. That response rate was measured in terms of how many beads students were able to string together, which was largely determined by the reinforcer magnitude. In this study, the operational definition of the reinforcer magnitude was candy, which children received for successfully stringing together beads in sets of 15.

The dimension of measurement included the successful completion of stringing together beads in sets of 15. The dimension of measurement also pertained to the number of candy that participants received for stringing together the beads in units of 15. The target behavior goal was for students to desire to continue stringing together beads to receive additional candy.

Materials

The materials utilized in this study included string and a copious quantity of beads which participants could utilize to string together. The outlining stimuli was individual pieces of candy in the form of Jolly Ranchers. The response measurement was predicated on the FR 15 schedule of reinforcement, in which students received a colored token for every 15 beads strung together. Token colors varied across the respective trials, and corresponded to different amounts of candy. Red tokens were redeemable for a single piece of candy. Blue tokens were redeemable for three pieces of candy; green tokens were redeemable for six pieces of candy.

Design

The primary variable was the color of tokens presented after participants were able to successfully string together a unit of 15 beads. Since the color of tokens widely differed in the amount of candy produced, this variable was instrumental in determining if the amount of beads that participants were able to produce -- which also directly correlated to the number of trials they wanted to participate in -- was related to the amount of candy that they received.

The candy, by means of the tokens, functioned as the reinforcer -- the color of the tokens, which was epitomized by the green candy and its six pieces of candy -- served as a means of gauging the reinforcer magnitude. The only other variable was the number of times participants wished to engage in the trial. They could choose to stop at any time they desired to do so; the same sentiment applied to their ability to continue with the trial.

PROCEDURES

The author set her stop watch for two minutes at the start of each new trial. Upon given a verbal cue, participants were allowed to string beads together. The author was tasked with counting the number of beads strung together in units of 15. After two minutes, participants were told to cease stringing beads, at which point the author tallied the number of beads strung together utilizing the FR 15 schedule of reinforcement. Each trial was randomly assigned a colored token awarded to participants for each unit of 15 beads strung together.

The author recorded both the number of beads strung and the response rate for each trial. The author then asked participants if they desired to conduct another trial. Basic instructions were given to participants prior to the commencement of the trial. There pertained to their attention span; they were permitted from eating, using electronic communication devices such as phones, and conversing with the author. They were also told that stringing beads earned them a token, and that they could continue stringing beads or stop at any point they wished.

RESULTS

The results of this experiment were fairly conclusive. Participants who received green tokens demonstrated a desire to continue stringing beads. Those who earned a red token wanted to continue stringing beads for a significant length of time less than those who received green tokens did. Similarly, those who earned blue tokens were able to continue stringing together beads more than those who earned red tokens did. However, in most instances they were able to do so less than those who earned green tokens were able to. Perhaps what was more revealing was the impact that the switch in tokens had on the participants.

In all but one instance those who earned red tokens desired to stop after their initial trial. Those who earned green tokens during their initial experiment ceased after earning red tokens during their second experiment. They also desisted from continuing after they earned red tokens during their second experiment. Those who earned blue tokens during their initial experiment also refrained from continuing after earning red tokens for their second experiment. Significantly, they opted to continue for a third experiment after earning blue tokens during their first trial, and green tokens during their second trial. There were very few students who opted to discontinue the trial after earning green or blue tokens during their initial trial. Perhaps this fact is attributed to their overall distaste for candy, or the flavor of jolly ranchers that they received. This variable could have potentially implemented a small degree of bias in this study.